488 réponses à ce sujet

[Br3admax]

It's actually the backstory and setting of the new MMO The Mass Effect, featured with a few more novel including one called The Mass Effect: Shepard and a few cameo appearances followed bye Shepard's disappearance during a Nova strike from a Batarian vanguard. At least that is how I see BioWare giving you guys closer. Is that really what you want?

[AlanC9]

crimzontearz wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

It'd be really strange if forum users were just like the majority of players on this topic. We poll very differently from what Bio's tracking data shows for every other question. Why would the ending response be any different?

then I'd LOVE to see these magic numbers and how they were obtained and an explanation of why the casual crowd which generally does not care and is not invested would be upset if Bioware acquiesced to give people a reunion scene (and please no be talking about respecting the IT or allowing people to let their Shepard die, I already explain how either argument is moot)

Huh? I didn't say that I had the numbers, or that Bio had them. Maybe Bio does, maybe they don't.

I'm just saying that we already know that forum users are far more likely than typical players to:

Play on PC
Replay the game
Finish the game
Play as FemShep
Play something other than Soldier
Side with the quarians

... and on and on.  It would be truly bizarre if the player base as a whole was just like us for this one topic when they're unlike us on every other topic. (Hell, maybe they hate the ending more than we do; that's possible too.)

As for no reunion scene, I already explained what happened. Pre-EC all the fuss was over not being able to get the breath scene, not whether the breath scene didn't make Shepard alive enough. It's not like the meaning Bio wanted to convey with the scenes isn't blindingly obvious, after all.

But gosh, I thought the real problem with the ending was that it was thematically bad or some such?

Modifié par AlanC9, 30 août 2013 - 04:12 .

[crimzontearz]

AlanC9 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

It'd be really strange if forum users were just like the majority of players on this topic. We poll very differently from what Bio's tracking data shows for every other question. Why would the ending response be any different?

then I'd LOVE to see these magic numbers and how they were obtained and an explanation of why the casual crowd which generally does not care and is not invested would be upset if Bioware acquiesced to give people a reunion scene (and please no be talking about respecting the IT or allowing people to let their Shepard die, I already explain how either argument is moot)

Huh? I didn't say that I had the numbers, or that Bio had them. Maybe Bio does, maybe they don't.

I'm just saying that we already know that forum users are far more likely than typical players to:

Play on PC
Replay the game
Finish the game
Play as FemShep
Play something other than Soldier
Side with the quarians

... and on and on.  It would be truly bizarre if the player base as a whole was just like us for this one topic when they're unlike us on every other topic. (Hell, maybe they hate the ending more than we do; that's possible too.)

As for no reunion scene, I already explained what happened. Pre-EC all the fuss was over not being able to get the breath scene, not whether the breath scene didn't make Shepard alive enough. It's not like the meaning Bio wanted to convey with the scenes isn't blindingly obvious, after all.

But gosh, I thought the real problem with the ending was that it was thematically bad or some such?

oh I thought you were responding to my post about numbers


as for the ending, that is a problem, and I would be 100% willing to overlook it for a reunion scene

subjective I know, but it is my stance.

[AlanC9]

Sure. I wouldn't mind a super EC that added even content to all four endings -- I'd like to see everyone get brutally killed in Refuse, find out what Synthesis feels like for the organics, and make the first few desicions as the Sheplyst. But I guess either the economics didn't work, or Bio had just had enough of working with the endings.

Modifié par AlanC9, 30 août 2013 - 04:31 .

[Reorte]

AlanC9 wrote...

As for no reunion scene, I already explained what happened. Pre-EC all the fuss was over not being able to get the breath scene, not whether the breath scene didn't make Shepard alive enough. It's not like the meaning Bio wanted to convey with the scenes isn't blindingly obvious, after all.

But gosh, I thought the real problem with the ending was that it was thematically bad or some such?

The intention is obvious but, like just about everything else ending-related, doesn't actually make any sense. Taken at face value they tell you absolutely nothing, and therefore remain unsatisfying. And as has been pointed out several times if the intention is obvious why not just go ahead and show it anyway?

The problem with the endings you know all too well, and that if there's emotional satisfaction it's easier to overlook them. Without any emotional satisfaction it has to fall back on quality of writing and so on and it's not got that either.

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

As for no reunion scene, I already explained what happened. Pre-EC all the fuss was over not being able to get the breath scene, not whether the breath scene didn't make Shepard alive enough. It's not like the meaning Bio wanted to convey with the scenes isn't blindingly obvious, after all.

1) The fuss was that the onl;y clue Shepard wasn't dead was hidden behind a MP wall
2) It's not blindingly obvious.  The complaints that it's not clear kinda make that...blindingly obvious 

But gosh, I thought the real problem with the ending was that it was thematically bad or some such?

It's both.  the endings fail on many levels.

[crimzontearz]

AlanC9 wrote...

Sure. I wouldn't mind a super EC that added even content to all four endings -- I'd like to see everyone get brutally killed in Refuse, find out what Synthesis feels like for the organics, and make the first few desicions as the Sheplyst. But I guess either the economics didn't work, or Bio had just had enough of working with the endings.

may that choice come back to bite them in the butt

[AlanC9]

Reorte wrote...

The intention is obvious but, like just about everything else ending-related, doesn't actually make any sense. Taken at face value they tell you absolutely nothing, and therefore remain unsatisfying. And as has been pointed out several times if the intention is obvious why not just go ahead and show it anyway?

By "taken at face value," you mean that VG scenes aren't to be interpreted the way identical scenes would be interpreted in movies or TV shows, right? It's conceivable; though I'm not quite sure why that would be. Anyway,  I imagine Bio won't try this style of presentation again; the main lession of ME3 seems to be that you'd better go the Oliver Stone route and pound your intended meaning into the head of every single player.

And again, the time to bring up that the breath clip wasn't doing its job was pre-EC. 

The problem with the endings you know all too well, and that if there's emotional satisfaction it's easier to overlook them. Without any emotional satisfaction it has to fall back on quality of writing and so on and it's not got that either.

 If you like, but then we have to define where emotional satisfaction comes from.

Modifié par AlanC9, 30 août 2013 - 07:01 .

[crimzontearz]

AlanC9 wrote...

Reorte wrote...

The intention is obvious but, like just about everything else ending-related, doesn't actually make any sense. Taken at face value they tell you absolutely nothing, and therefore remain unsatisfying. And as has been pointed out several times if the intention is obvious why not just go ahead and show it anyway?

By "taken at face value," you mean that VG scenes aren't to be interpreted the way identical scenes would be interpreted in movies or TV shows, right? It's conceivable; though I'm not quite sure why that would be. Anyway,  I imagine Bio won't try this style of presentation again; the main lession of ME3 seems to be that you'd better go the Oliver Stone route and pound your intended meaning into the head of every single player.

And again, the time to bring up that the breath clip wasn't doing its job was pre-EC. 

The problem with the endings you know all too well, and that if there's emotional satisfaction it's easier to overlook them. Without any emotional satisfaction it has to fall back on quality of writing and so on and it's not got that either.

 If you like, but then we have to define where emotional satisfaction comes from.

so the further trolling about its significance? what was that?

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...


By "taken at face value," you mean that VG scenes aren't to be interpreted the way identical scenes would be interpreted in movies or TV shows, right? It's conceivable; though I'm not quite sure why that would be.

Because it's a different medium?

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

As for no reunion scene, I already explained what happened. Pre-EC all the fuss was over not being able to get the breath scene, not whether the breath scene didn't make Shepard alive enough. It's not like the meaning Bio wanted to convey with the scenes isn't blindingly obvious, after all.

1) The fuss was that the onl;y clue Shepard wasn't dead was hidden behind a MP wall
2) It's not blindingly obvious.  The complaints that it's not clear kinda make that...blindingly obvious 

Point 1: I didn't think the why mattered for our purposes here. But sure, that was the why.

As for point 2, the intent isn't obvious? Really? What else could they be trying to convey? I get that the scene doesn't actually convey the intended meaning for people using your interpretive method, but what's a plausible alternative theory of the intent?

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...


By "taken at face value," you mean that VG scenes aren't to be interpreted the way identical scenes would be interpreted in movies or TV shows, right? It's conceivable; though I'm not quite sure why that would be.

Because it's a different medium?

Different how? I see characters and events happening on a screen. Maybe there's an argument there, but nobody's making it.

Not that that's on you, but is there a workable theory kicking around about how VG interpretation and TV interpretation are different and should be different?

Modifié par AlanC9, 30 août 2013 - 07:13 .

[Azaron Nightblade]

AlanC9 wrote...

iakus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

As for no reunion scene, I already explained what happened. Pre-EC all the fuss was over not being able to get the breath scene, not whether the breath scene didn't make Shepard alive enough. It's not like the meaning Bio wanted to convey with the scenes isn't blindingly obvious, after all.

1) The fuss was that the onl;y clue Shepard wasn't dead was hidden behind a MP wall
2) It's not blindingly obvious.  The complaints that it's not clear kinda make that...blindingly obvious 

Point 1: I didn't think the why mattered for our purposes here. But sure, that was the why.

As for point 2, the intent isn't obvious? Really? What else could they be trying to convey? I get that the scene doesn't actually convey the intended meaning for people using your interpretive method, but what's a plausible alternative theory of the intent?

One of the things that made me doubt it was intended to be Shepard (and not some symbolic gesture about hope and some people surviving and getting back up) was that the N7 Marine had a very visible N7 symbol on his armor - something I didn't manage to find on what was left of Shepard's armor when he stumbled through the portal.
Is the body taking a breath female if you've played a female Shepard?

[crimzontearz]

That was dog tags, not a symbol on the armor

[KaiserShep]

Azaron Nightblade wrote...

One of the things that made me doubt it was intended to be Shepard (and not some symbolic gesture about hope and some people surviving and getting back up) was that the N7 Marine had a very visible N7 symbol on his armor - something I didn't manage to find on what was left of Shepard's armor when he stumbled through the portal.
Is the body taking a breath female if you've played a female Shepard?

It makes no sense at all to assume that it could be anyone other than Shepard. Random, anonymous soldiers don't have any impact to the player. The survival of one soldier somewhere does not matter one iota. Also, consider that Shepard is the only actual character we see throughout the entire series that wears the N7 emblem, which is pretty much the symbol used for Shepard at that point. Note that the N7 logo is used to represent Shepard in lieu of showing his or her face like the other characters during the squad talent upgrade screen.

As for the gender of the body you see, check the Destroy ending clips for both male and female Shepards. The torso is a different shape between the two, and the gasp is different as well.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 30 août 2013 - 08:07 .

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

As for point 2, the intent isn't obvious? Really? What else could they be trying to convey? I get that the scene doesn't actually convey the intended meaning for people using your interpretive method, but what's a plausible alternative theory of the intent?

I've seen a sig around here with a great quote attributed to David Gaider that really fits the situation:

"Our intention means nothing to the player when they're on the receiving end"

[crimzontearz]

But gaider is on the DA team....tho the fellow has good ideas

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

Different how? I see characters and events happening on a screen. Maybe there's an argument there, but nobody's making it.

Not that that's on you, but is there a workable theory kicking around about how VG interpretation and TV interpretation are different and should be different?

Of course they're different.  You aren't just seeing characters and events on the screen, you are an active participant in what is happening.  That's going to change your perspective and interpretation of what unfolds.  THe player has far more invested in what's going on than the observer. 

[Iakus]

crimzontearz wrote...

But gaider is on the DA team....tho the fellow has good ideas

Indeed.  I just thought the quote was particularly appropriate concerning people's problems with the breath scene and what the intention for it was.

In tother words, it doesn't matter what the intention was if it fails to convey it.

[crimzontearz]

Indeed

And he likes NG+....that is a good thing LOL

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...

Of course they're different.  You aren't just seeing characters and events on the screen, you are an active participant in what is happening.  That's going to change your perspective and interpretation of what unfolds.  THe player has far more invested in what's going on than the observer. 

Am I really an active participant in a cutscene? Even one with my PC in it?

And how are you getting from the degree of investment to a different interpretation of what happens in a scene?  I don't see any relationship between the two. But obviously I wouldn't, since I don't interpret VG scenes differently in the first place.

Modifié par AlanC9, 30 août 2013 - 08:55 .

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

As for point 2, the intent isn't obvious? Really? What else could they be trying to convey? I get that the scene doesn't actually convey the intended meaning for people using your interpretive method, but what's a plausible alternative theory of the intent?

I've seen a sig around here with a great quote attributed to David Gaider that really fits the situation:

"Our intention means nothing to the player when they're on the receiving end"

Sure. But I specifically was talking about intent in the bit you replied to. That was what was blindingly obvious.So the Gaider quote isn't on point.

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...


Am I really an active participant in a cutscene? Even one with my PC in it?

If the cutscene is a result of the choices you made, yes.

And how are you getting from the degree of investment to a different interpretation of what happens in a scene?  I don't see any relationship between the two. But obviously I wouldn't, since I don't interpret VG scenes differently in the first place.

Because people tend to see things differently when they are an active participant versus an outside observer.

[adayaday]

You might aswell say that watching a lets play is the same as playing the game itself,or sitting next to the driver is the same as driving the car.

[AlanC9]

But in the case of a cutscene, the car is parked. Even if I parked the car myself, I'm still just sitting there.

@ iakus: tend to see things differently... how, exactly? I'd ask "why" but it's obviously not a reasoned thing.

Edit:  are we all talking about the same thing here? I'm talking only about what the scene tells us happened in the game world, not emotional fulfillment or any of that stuff.

Modifié par AlanC9, 30 août 2013 - 09:48 .